Okay I need to keep coding stuff into this app to make it more useful. For example, I want there to be a weapon stat section. I incorporated some weapon stats into my Space Canadian cards, but really weapons need their own cards. Can someone make some weapon cards or something? Or maybe I can just make a spreadsheet?

Some other stuff I could add to make the application more useful that I'm thinking of would be like calculators for some of the in-game math like momentum damage, or creation CP cost, or rule references. How would y'all feel about that?

▲▲ ▲

"Each night alone I dream, that I'm a rebel Roller Queen‼I'll be a star that shines, I can make the whole world mine‼"

Natalya wrote:Some other stuff I could add to make the application more useful that I'm thinking of would be like calculators for some of the in-game math like momentum damage, or creation CP cost, or rule references. How would y'all feel about that?

I have a printout of the major rule references that takes up about 3 pages. One page is just minifig weapons, one is for vehicle weapons (and some example vehicle speeds), and the third page is half structure levels (with examples) and combat modifiers like cover and whatnot (basically all the crap in the minifig combat chapter).

samuelzz10 wrote:If the players decide, there is often disagreeing on who controls the npc.

WISG.

I understand that you're more the RPG-style player, and you like your numbers. But save that for your version of BrikRPG, and stop messing around with the simpler core game. It's like going to a T-ball game and trying to teach the kids how to optimize their hitting distance with different angles and spin.

I understand that you're more the RPG-style player, and you like your numbers. But save that for your version of BrikRPG, and stop messing around with the simpler core game. It's like going to a T-ball game and trying to teach the kids how to optimize their hitting distance with different angles and spin.

Hm. I want to argue that but I can't really.

On one hand, rules and numbers or, more generally, a game's mechanical structure can certainly add context. As you imply, RPGs are a prime example but we've seen this in wargames as well. The structure informs what you do, lends it credence, gives it a backbone. Generally, especially in RPGs, the primary reason for doing this is to provide a fair gaming environment and the purpose in that is to maximize each person's fun around the table (knowing nothing about who will be playing and providing each average person the equal opportunity to achieve victories, whatever that means). But it also serves as a literal translation for ideas, a medium through which to express the exchange of ideas. Damage versus armor or hit points, as for example, are just numbers but they express the flow of combat, the status of the combatants and their willingness to continue fighting, and they serve as the medium through which we explain our actions (20 damage becomes judo chop).

On the other hand, and without disregarding the above ideas, its written into the mechanical structure of BrikWars to not really give a flying fuck. WISG boils any rules dispute down to almost its simplest form. If you wanted to be a real twat, you could run an entire game with nothing but WISG rolls. Or coin tosses. Or Roshambo. The game's narrative encourages us to discard notions of fairness and even takes the stance that we really shouldn't need rules at all, that we wouldn't if we weren't all such banal, creatively dead, weak-minded, blithering idiots. Or some such thing. Honestly, I think that's the funniest thing about BrikWars, that paradoxical stance.

In any case, the agreeing point is to have fun, however it is you (and really, we're speaking "as a group or set of BrikWars players" whenever possible) do that. Ultimately, for me, its really up to the group consensus whenever I play that determines our level of rules depth. I have my limits, though, even as a hobbyist game designer, and I'll drop out if shit starts to give me a headache. I think one of the quintessential issues here is that Rayhawk's game is simply the best LEGO style game in existence for a lot of us. Despite itself, its clever and engaging. It's simple but complex enough to maintain interest in a large number of scenarios and its multigenre to boot. What I'm driving at is that if there is one game "on the market" that satisfies most or all of your gaming needs related to that type of game, all the competitors are poor by comparison (or if not poor, then more specific to certain wants), and you as a player have no time, energy, or desire to create your own whole rules system, then the easiest thing to do when you want to see a new feature or more depth (or less) is modify that one game.